 |
| John Fenty - concerned at 'liabilities' |
CONSERVATIVE councillor John Fenty will tonight speak out on what he sees as 'negligent actions' and 'shocking management' by the Labour-controlled administration of North East Lincolnshire. This is the speech he is set to make at a full meeting of the council to be held in Cleethorpes Town Hall.
It is with great
concern and disappointment that I feel compelled to propose this motion.
I rather hoped
that ‘interjections’, ‘concerns raised’, in the past and over many years had
been listened too, or the Councils actions rationally justified.
Often, they have
not been justified Madam Mayor, so I raised my concerns at the Audit and
Governance Committee after asking for exclusion of the press and public.
What followed was
a complaint from senior officers to my group leader that I was being political.
If that were
remotely the case Madam Mayor I would not have proposed exclusion
of the press and public.
I raised issues
that concern me around about what I believe to be policy shortfall, or failure
to follow such, and further, Cllr Barfield reinforced the same concerns.
Further Madam
Mayor, I had been written to by the chair of Audit and Governance following
this closed-door meeting suggesting and alternative course of action. Actions
that I had already followed many, many times indeed.
Madam Mayor, I am
not being political at all, but often find closed doors to questions raised, or
insufficient transparency and shocking management of public assets in my
humble opinion.
To share just
some Madam Mayor.
Public Toilet
closure was proposed by this administration in 2015, yes madam Mayor, all of
them to be closed down. It’s preposterous isn’t it!!!!! Unbelievable, that
Labour could propose closure of public toilets in a tourist destination.
When I exposed
flaws in the financial spread sheet , which was driving this crazy closure, it
was demonstrated that savings could be met, and fortunately, this crazy closure
was reversed.
What ensued was
the installation of not fit for purpose coin operated paddle-gates, which has
resulted in the free use of the facilities for several years and budgeted
incomes therefore were entirely lost.
Recently Madam
Mayor Cllr Brookes questioned Labours decision to replace the coin-ops for cashless
payment card to the access public toilets.
Madam Mayor, in an
unfortunate and familiar pattern, this was taken in closed session for which I
cannot fathom, why the secrecy, it’s of great public concern, and interest.
Cashless access
to the public toilet and out sourcing their management are public domain so why
the expulsion of the press and public.
What emanated
from that closed meeting, was that principle savings had been met, by
outsourcing the management of the public toilet facilities even without
charging for the facilities.
So, Madam Mayor, how
come, the savings required are so easily met by the private sector? it begs
important questions, about this administrations Estates Management.
Madam Mayor I
despair, but it is a familiar shortcoming that this Labour led administration
cannot manage its assets.
Take the Fitties
chalet park which provided an important source of reoccurring income.
Appalling
management of this heritage asset, and failure to secure market value in two
missed rent rises, which left the council severely out of pocket by hundreds of
thousands annually, so they sold the Fitties Chalet Park for little over £2
million.
The new owners
have in place, rent rises of 300% effective at 2021, returning circa £860,000
per annum. That’s pure profit as all other costs incurred in operating the site
are collected through service charges, levied separately on tenants.
These are
negligent actions in my humble opinion Madam Mayor on an unbelievable scale.
This Labour administration should hang its head in shame.
Madam Mayor, I
have many such examples that give me serious concerns about future liabilities,
for which this council has not answered, or even worse it doesn’t know, or
understand.
O’Neill’s pub was
sighted as a strategic purchase. Could someone here tonight state just what is
the strategy for its acquisition, because, it’s there for all to see, a
building that remains boarded up, unoccupied, a blight on the resort, oh and by
the way Madam Mayor, the potential returns, stand in the shadow of those
achieved from the badly managed Fitties Estate when that was in the Councils ownership.
The Knoll has
been pre-let to the Armed Forces for 25 year free of charge subject to internal
insurance and repairs only
I have no problem
with that.
However, the
issue of who picks up the cost of the structure of this listed building will be
significant and falls to the Council.
I had a question,
at the last but one full council in this regard, relating to the Knoll, and was
asked by Cllr Wheatley to put it in writing for a written response. I followed
this with a supplementary question to receive an astonishing response which
follows.
Dear John,
I have given you a written response to the question
you asked at full council as per the minute taken.
To request further answers by email on that written
response is outside of the constitution of the council.
I am sure that you are quite aware of that.
End===================================================
Again, refusal to
answers to simple questions. Not even to allow a supplementary.
I move on Madam
Mayor.
The Wilkin Chapman
building, two and a half years on after its completion, we see the under-croft
suite of shops ‘Not Let’, and therefore remain unoccupied.
Visit the site,
and see the sheer incompetence for yourself, it states ‘To Let’ across the
windows. No contact telephone number, nor is there a letting agent appointed, additionally
if a tenant had been found, the principle tenant has a veto to disallow them.
Who’s advising on
all these things Madam Mayor, where is the legal and professional advice, and
most importantly, why are this Labour administration allowing this Council to
perform this way.
Madam Mayor, there has been procrastination for
too many years, over the construction of a
‘new’ fit for purpose Border Inspection Post, a replacement, that is fit for the 21st
century, and in the right location.
Checks of food stuff should be carried out in suitable premises, being
in the right location, so as not to stymie opportunity for growth, or cause
delays in the movement of perishable goods, and adding to unnecessary road congestion.
Nothing has changed Madam Mayor.
This administration has hidden behind ABP for too long. The existing
facility is dated, and not fit for purpose, it is a statutory duty, and a new
facility should have been delivered before now.
To move on Madam Mayor, Councillors were met with an avalanche of
disenchanted business tenants from within the council’s business centres, when,
without warning rents rose by 200%.
Again, several rent reviews dates had been missed, which is frankly
staggering Madam Mayor.
This Labour lead Council again fail to have a policy for managing its business
centres, and worse still, is that mature businesses have enjoyed rent levels
intended for start-up businesses.
Aimlessly operating these centres, has created poorly maintained
building stock, and will have inevitably put off would be investors in this
sector, as competing against such rent levels, were not viable.
Many in the chamber Madam Mayor, will have witnessed the Transfer of
assets to community groups and Parish councils, which has often been torturous,
protracted and sometimes has taken years, it often defied logic.
Tollbar
Roundabout, yes Madam Mayor, the community will not forgive this Labour administration,
as they have railroaded against massive public objection, a decision to rip up
this roundabout, and to be replaced with a high-speed traffic light junction.
In my humble
opinion Madam Mayor, not only is this an offensive waste of public money, it
will also heighten the risk of serious injury, and potentially worse, for the
2000 plus children crossings each school day.
Welholme Galleries,
a property the Council rented and wilfully neglected, so much so Madam Mayor, that
the dilapidation cost, committed the Cabinet to think purchasing the property was
the right action. Notwithstanding that their plans are to dispose at less than
best value, (a giveaway is most likely), which raises significant questions, of
who will fund the dilapidation estimated £2million.
Madam Mayor this
Administration ignored repeated warnings, of the dangerous condition, and deterioration
of the Victoria Mill for over 10 years, during which time the then owners had
assets, which would have compelled them, to meet their obligations, to protect
this important listed building, had the Council excised powers available to it
then.
Instead Madam
Mayor, through failed actions, the Council incurred mammoth costs. Chaos was
inflicted on the road network, having to shut down Victoria Street, and decanting
residents into alternative accommodation, and installing emergency scaffolding
to address the hazards, while it considered a course of action.
Council tax
payers again pick up the bill, which has run into millions Madam Mayor, and it
doesn’t stop there.
After all this
avoidable spending, are this administration rubbing further salt into the
wound, by the apparent agreement to acquire another lame duck. Classified as a
complimentary strategic purchase which carries enormous risk, for which I’m not
at liberty to fully explain, as once again this Council, when it suits,
operates veiled policy.
Despite many
questions raised, for a clarification of the Cabinets proposals for the Mill,
in both private, and public sessions, they are still not answered, and in one
such public session, a portfolio holder stated “that’s a matter for the Cabinet,
the Cabinet are the decision-making body. Madam Mayor That is not good enough,
and particularly when we are being asked to scrutinise what I can only describe
as another lame duck acquisition under a veil of secrecy.
Would anyone like
to share tonight exactly what are the Cabinets plans for the Mill?? How will it
operate, what will be the future costs to the Council?
Madam Mayor, we
are elected members, and have absolute right to press and seek assurances, and
I make no apology for that. I attend scrutiny with the duty, as bestowed upon
me by the electorate, to consider the papers before me, and scrutinise them
carefully. Sadly, Madam Mayor questions are often absent candid responses.
Madam Mayor our
staff are too very important assets, and not only should we support and nurture
them, but importantly hold them to account, which begs the question as the
Engie contractual obligations near the end of its contract,
So what’s next
Madam Mayor?
I understand
significant savings circa £2mill are being asked of them, in managing the Council’s
business and rightly so.
I too, understand
that the requested savings are being confused with a request from Engie to
consider an extension to the contract by a number of years which feels very
uncomfortable to me.
I would
personally caution against extension, and the reason is very simple. We expect
and were promised value for money.
There have been
huge changes in local government, so in my humble opinion, the services
requested from Engie at onset, are quite different from the service required
today, so we either, need a clean break and return it to an inhouse function,
or go out to tender as soon as possible to ensure value for money.
So, in that
regard if there are efficiencies which can be made, they should made, and
should not be confused with Engie’s suggestion of contract extension.
Under Labour
control Council debt has risen to over £100 million, and what do we have to
show for it?
Madam
Mayor I offer this extract of examples, in the hope that members agree with me,
that this council undertakes a strategic review, and that scrutiny be requested
to establish a select committee, to commission detailed analysis of key assets
and commercial estates, to make recommendations back to scrutiny and for potential
referral to cabinet.
